The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

Claude Haiku 5.5 vs DeepSeek-V4-Flash-Max

Claude Haiku 5.5 leads the LLM Stats Score 50.0 to 38.9. DeepSeek-V4-Flash-Max is 1.8x cheaper per token.

Anthropic · DeepSeek · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

Claude Haiku 5.5 leads the overall LLM Stats Score 50.0 to 38.9, ranking #19 overall.

In the 2 individual benchmarks reported for both models, Claude Haiku 5.5 wins 2; this is a narrower head-to-head signal than the composite indexes.

On price, DeepSeek-V4-Flash-Max is roughly 1.8x cheaper per token on a blended 3:1 input/output basis, which adds up quickly at production volume.

DeepSeek-V4-Flash-Max also accepts a larger context window (1,048,576 input tokens), making it the stronger choice for long documents and large codebases.

Based on current LLM Stats indexes, shared benchmarks, pricing, and model metadata for 2026.

Choose Claude Haiku 5.5

  • overall performance matters — it scores 50.0 and ranks #19 on LLM Stats
  • your work emphasizes reasoning and coding — it leads those capability indexes
  • you value its reported benchmark strengths — it wins 2 of 2 exact shared results
  • you want the most recent training data — it shipped Oct 2026

Choose DeepSeek-V4-Flash-Max

  • cost matters — it's about 1.8x cheaper per token
  • you process long inputs — it offers a 1,048,576 token context window
  • you need open weights you can self-host or fine-tune

At a glance

The differences that matter most.

Claude Haiku 5.5
Anthropic
DeepSeek-V4-Flash-Max
DeepSeek
Core performance indexes
LLM Stats Score
50.0
#19
38.9
#70
Reasoning
47.2
#27
39.6
#67
Coding
40.2
#13
28.3
#68
Agents
33.3
#28
17.9
#83
Cost, coverage & limits
Benchmark wins
2 of 2
0 of 2
Input price
$0.10 / M
$0.09 / M
Output price
$0.50 / M
$0.18 / M
Context window
1,000,000
1,048,576

Capability indexes

Additional strengths measured across groups of related public benchmarks

2 shared
Index
Claude Haiku 5.5
DeepSeek-V4-Flash-Max
Math
25.7#110
39.1#20
Tool use
20.3#59
16.6#87
Conservative TrueSkill rating · higher is betterHow scores work

Individual benchmarks

36 reported for Claude Haiku 5.5 · 19 for DeepSeek-V4-Flash-Max

2 shared

Claude Haiku 5.5 outperforms in 2 benchmarks (SWE-bench Multilingual, SWE-Bench Pro), while DeepSeek-V4-Flash-Max is better at 0 benchmarks.

Claude Haiku 5.5 significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.

Mon Oct 12 2026 • llm-stats.com

Human preference

Blind head-to-head votes and playground preference scores

Pricing Analysis

Price comparison per million tokens

DeepSeek-V4-Flash-Max costs less

For input processing, Claude Haiku 5.5 ($0.10/1M tokens) is 1.1x more expensive than DeepSeek-V4-Flash-Max ($0.09/1M tokens).

For output processing, Claude Haiku 5.5 ($0.50/1M tokens) is 2.8x more expensive than DeepSeek-V4-Flash-Max ($0.18/1M tokens).

In conclusion, Claude Haiku 5.5 is more expensive than DeepSeek-V4-Flash-Max.*

* Using a 3:1 ratio of input to output tokens

Lowest available price from all providers
Mon Oct 12 2026 • llm-stats.com
Anthropic
Claude Haiku 5.5
Input tokens$0.10
Output tokens$0.50
Best providerAnthropic
DeepSeek
DeepSeek-V4-Flash-Max
Input tokens$0.09
Output tokens$0.18
Best providerDeepinfra
Notice missing or incorrect data?

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

DeepSeek-V4-Flash-Max accepts 1,048,576 input tokens compared to Claude Haiku 5.5's 1,000,000 tokens. DeepSeek-V4-Flash-Max can generate longer responses up to 1,048,576 tokens, while Claude Haiku 5.5 is limited to 128,000 tokens.

Anthropic
Claude Haiku 5.5
Input1,000,000 tokens
Output128,000 tokens
DeepSeek
DeepSeek-V4-Flash-Max
Input1,048,576 tokens
Output1,048,576 tokens
Mon Oct 12 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input capabilities

Documented input modalities across available providers

Claude Haiku 5.5 supports multimodal inputs, whereas DeepSeek-V4-Flash-Max does not.

Claude Haiku 5.5 can handle both text and other forms of data like images, making it suitable for multimodal applications.

Claude Haiku 5.5

Text
Images
Audio
Video

DeepSeek-V4-Flash-Max

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

Claude Haiku 5.5 is licensed under a proprietary license, while DeepSeek-V4-Flash-Max uses MIT.

License differences may affect how you can use these models in commercial or open-source projects.

Claude Haiku 5.5

Proprietary

Closed source

DeepSeek-V4-Flash-Max

MIT

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Claude Haiku 5.5 was released on 2026-10-07, while DeepSeek-V4-Flash-Max was released on 2026-04-23.

Claude Haiku 5.5 is 6 months newer than DeepSeek-V4-Flash-Max.

Claude Haiku 5.5

Oct 7, 2026

5 days ago

5mo newer
DeepSeek-V4-Flash-Max

Apr 23, 2026

5 months ago

Knowledge Cutoff

When training data ends

Claude Haiku 5.5 has a documented knowledge cutoff of 2026-06-01, while DeepSeek-V4-Flash-Max's cutoff date is not specified.

We can confirm Claude Haiku 5.5's training data extends to 2026-06-01, but cannot make a direct comparison without DeepSeek-V4-Flash-Max's cutoff date.

Claude Haiku 5.5

Jun 2026

DeepSeek-V4-Flash-Max

—

Provider Availability

Claude Haiku 5.5 is available from Anthropic. DeepSeek-V4-Flash-Max is available from DeepInfra, DeepSeek.

Claude Haiku 5.5

anthropic logo
Anthropic
Input Price:Input: $0.10/1MOutput Price:Output: $0.50/1M

DeepSeek-V4-Flash-Max

deepinfra logo
Deepinfra
Input Price:Input: $0.09/1MOutput Price:Output: $0.18/1M
deepseek logo
DeepSeek
Input Price:Input: $0.14/1MOutput Price:Output: $0.28/1M
* Prices shown are per million tokens

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?

Judge for yourself.

Run your own prompts against Claude Haiku 5.5 and DeepSeek-V4-Flash-Max side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

Claude Haiku 5.5
✓ Preferred
DeepSeek-V4-Flash-Max
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about Claude Haiku 5.5 vs DeepSeek-V4-Flash-Max.

Which is better, Claude Haiku 5.5 or DeepSeek-V4-Flash-Max?

Claude Haiku 5.5 leads the LLM Stats Score 50.0 to 38.9. Claude Haiku 5.5 is made by Anthropic and DeepSeek-V4-Flash-Max is made by DeepSeek. The best choice depends on your use case — compare their capability indexes, individual benchmarks, pricing, and limits above.

How does Claude Haiku 5.5 compare to DeepSeek-V4-Flash-Max in benchmarks?

Claude Haiku 5.5 scores Global-MMLU: 87.8%, MILU: 87.6%, BenchCAD (with Python tool): 87.0%, Chartography: 86.2%, SWE-bench Multilingual: 83.7%. DeepSeek-V4-Flash-Max scores CodeForces: 100.0%, HMMT Feb 26: 94.8%, LiveCodeBench: 91.6%, IMO-AnswerBench: 88.4%, GPQA: 88.1%.

Is Claude Haiku 5.5 cheaper than DeepSeek-V4-Flash-Max?

DeepSeek-V4-Flash-Max is 1.1x cheaper for input tokens. Claude Haiku 5.5 costs $0.10/M input and $0.50/M output via anthropic. DeepSeek-V4-Flash-Max costs $0.09/M input and $0.18/M output via deepinfra.

What are the context window sizes for Claude Haiku 5.5 and DeepSeek-V4-Flash-Max?

Claude Haiku 5.5 supports 1.0M tokens and DeepSeek-V4-Flash-Max supports 1.0M tokens. A larger context window lets you process longer documents, conversations, or codebases in a single request.

What are the main differences between Claude Haiku 5.5 and DeepSeek-V4-Flash-Max?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (50.0 vs 38.9), context window (1.0M vs 1.0M), input pricing ($0.10 vs $0.09/M), multimodal support (yes vs no), licensing (Proprietary vs MIT). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes Claude Haiku 5.5 and DeepSeek-V4-Flash-Max?

Claude Haiku 5.5 is developed by Anthropic and DeepSeek-V4-Flash-Max is developed by DeepSeek.

Related comparisons